A good leader does not follow just one style of management; he or she modifies a style as required by a situation or culture. We often call this situational leadership, where one style never fits all, and the new-age leader needs to adopt whatever technique will deliver the best outcome. Often, we confuse agile thinking with flexibility. They are different, and in this chapter, we are talking about leadership that is nimble-footed, or in other words, more alert. An agile style of management is about understanding the problem statement clearly and adapting to the needs as per data or tools available, instead of following a set pattern to arrive at a solution. This is a requirement as in the future, teams will need even more flexibility, autonomy and power for decision-making as they become self-managed, operating mostly remotely.
Like any other style of leadership, agile leadership also needs a team to work together towards a common goal, and a leader needs to create an environment where there is collaboration among the teams, ensuring that they learn from each other and focus on continuous improvement. This also means empowering teams to take decisions. One of the proven benefits of agile leadership is that response to stakeholders or customers is faster and decision-making is often quicker.
Agile leadership thus cannot be successful if a leader tries to micro-manage, as the leader needs to let go so the team can arrive at a solution. This demands trust and ownership among team members, as they own the outcome. This style of leadership also helps an organization adapt to change faster than a more traditional approach. It also helps leaders grasp the needs of stakeholders and customers more closely, thus helping them get what they want.
An agile leader needs to ensure that a proper process is in place for the team to act, with a governance and preestablished review structure. He or she will intervene only when needed. This does not mean that the leader is absolved of all responsibility, as he or she is still accountable for the final delivery. And that’s a difficult balance to strike since most traditional leaders are not comfortable with letting go and want to be hands-on while delivering an outcome.
An agile leader ensures that the atmosphere is right for each member of the team to own the deliverables, take decisions and be successful, neither micro-managing nor leaving everything to others. And with the evolving world, the growing need for remote working and with the support of enabling technology, this new style of leadership is widely recognized as the need of the hour.
Also read: How Chandra Shekhar govt and RBI hatched a plan to pledge India’s gold in 1991
An agile leader believes that solutions evolve on a real-time basis and that the solutions of the past may not be the solutions of today as they need to change along with the times. Instead of relying on knowledge of the past, they depend more on crossfunctional discussions to pool in more ideas and skills, so the teams who are self-managing might come up with solutions that have never been tried before. Moreover, these leaders want to be closer to their customers and stakeholders to understand the real issues and the solutions they are looking for, to focus on what is needed versus what can be offered. Customer centricity plays an important role.
A few months ago, my friend, who leads the global sales operations of a multinational based out of Germany, recruited Daniel to lead their European operations. He came from an oil and gas giant that is known for its agile culture and impressed the recruiter with his in-depth knowledge of the process. Daniel joined the company in early 2020 and settled down well. In a short time, he was able to deliver results. And then the COVID-19 crisis hit the world and he was forced to operate from his home for the next few months. Projects that had been progressing well came almost to a standstill, and upon review, Daniel blamed the issues on the external crisis.
He believed he was not able to drive the change that was needed as people were away from office and he had no direct control over them. Daniel presented his revised plan, and my friend accepted the delay in progress and agreed to the revised timelines. But even after three months, nothing much had changed. A deep dive into the matter showed that Daniel had all the knowledge of agile ways of working, but it was only theoretical. In practice, he was a traditional manager who wanted direct control over his team members and did not adapt to the changing environment that had arisen due to COVID-19.
Also read: How Dalit leaders created rift between Ambedkar’s savarna wife and son after he died
Where he failed was in empowering the team to take decisions, providing freedom and instilling a sense of trust. He did not stand by his people or establish clear responsibility and governance mechanisms, which are critical to lead in times of crisis. When my friend spoke to Daniel about why he had not adapted to changing times, Daniel was clear in his thinking. He had been afraid that if he moved away from his own traditional style of management and granted too much autonomy to the team, then the power would be misused. Being new to the company, Daniel had also felt his leadership might be considered too friendly or weak by his team members. Daniel failed to ensure a balance between autonomy and control. Following are a few important aspects of agile leadership that Daniel failed to practise.
This excerpt from ‘Outskill: Future-Proofing Your Career In The Post-Pandemic World’ by Partha Basu has been published with permission from Harper Collins India.